Without basing anything on Unprovable Beliefs, what would this guide book include?
...in other words, what would our world be like if no one believed in anything not proven on the physical plane? - a world where societies are based on logical, scientifically accepted observations, only. - would it be a society where only a few have power: the logical Spock-types? Or would everyone be able to get on board?
I'm pretty sure you live in a supposed secular society, I know I do. We have laws that tell us what is required from us and what the consequences are. So it would look pretty much as it does now except with less running around on Sundays.
Well, in that case we should be more like Germany... they are very atheistic and do a lot of questioning, philosophizing and thinking. So, I do not know about that. We don't do much thinking outside the box here. I believe Christian doctrines makes the majority of Americans very docile and obedient. Yikes! did I keyboard that?
Americans, docile and obedient? Please forgive me but American's are not know as docile or obedient to those outside the U.S.
- to one German gal, who I spoke with at a party the other evening, they are. She is a college professor here in So. Cal and She Told Me, In general, her students don't have much interest or fascination with the world or their studies and just work to get good grades. What can of worms have I opened now? Is it a possibility or not. No, so forget about it.
I must stop this irresponsible keyboarding. Never mind. So sorry. I apologize. Take me off the list. I will quietly go.
Did I say never mind? I am not cut out for this type of work. I fire my self. Good bye. Put this one to bed immediately...
The fact is, scratch that... it happens to be my opinion, that we are letting our POTUS get away with way too much. WTM!!!! Plato warns us about people like him. It is a matter of JUSTICE!
(which is what Plato's Republic is all about. )
Perhaps it's time to change your system. Our Prime Minister doesn't have as much power as your boss does. He is also not guaranteed complete terms. But I try not to get involved in American politics as Americans seem to get upset when I feel I'm allowed to comment.
Our "boss" is not supposed to be our boss!
In Plato's Republic the tyrant is seen as the unhappiest of all men. Because no one likes him.
The system has changed and that is the Problem. Our system was based on human nature and how to keep the government from becoming too powerful. It is not logical that we do nothing to stop the current tide of political power grabs by our elected representatives / politicians.
However, that we even have that system in place is based on the belief in God and inalienable rights offered to us by Him.
No the system hasn't changed. He is allowed more powers because he is able to give himself more power.
Rights offered to you by God. Centre of the universe much? Not being able to see past your self much?
Oh my gosh amighty! The tyrant is the unhappiest of men, yet he works against his own best interest. WHY? In Obama's case, is it because he cares not about his OWN best interest? Is he is going by logic and scientific reasoning in effort to save the nation and/or the world??
Here we go!!!
So a logical and scientifically based society would feature the following precepts:
1. The residents/citizens would not be "self centered" or "self" oriented. Instead, they would be "others" oriented.
Agreed, Rad Man?
Claiming God has given you the land is rather self centred. No?
I claimed that God gave us certain rights. The land does make it possible to obtain those rights.
1. Citizens are "others" oriented, since each person is not the only one in the world.
2. Land is not to be "owned" by citizens or nations, as it already "belongs" to all of life.
A guide book on how to live would primarily be a book on Ethics.
Ethics can and should be introduced to children (and adults too, if the need has not been addressed) without reference to any supernatural source or influence.
The ancient Greeks had no trouble distinguishing Ethics from religion, and neither should we.
About a quarter of the self-help books on the market would fit this description.
It would probably look something like this...
Our logical and scientifically based Utopia is shaping up just fine at this point!
1. There are no "Citizens."
2. There are no borders.
3. Sharing with others is expected.
4. Self-orientation is not allowed.
5. The spirit of working for the sake of Others is required.
6. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are not guaranteed.
7. Equality is to be enforced in the interest of fairness/justice.
8. Leaders and any control over Others is Taboo.
9. All conversations and verbal exchanges are to be that which is logical and provable.
10. Kindness and thankfulness are not to be expressed, as they are not logically necessary.
I got this from my own deductive reasoning based on previous comments from you and others.
There is no way you got that from anything I said.
Well, apart from RadMan, I'm your only other respondent. I suggested your guide book would in effect be a book on Ethics, which would not even vaguely resemble your 10-point plan. But you showed no interest in what it might comprise.
O.k. I am now! I didn't know you had more to add! If you would like to explain Ethics, I'm quite interested. I admit I came up with my 10-point plan way too quick. The Greeks probably took their time with these matters.
A couple of years ago I explored this area in a few hubs, along with a great many helpful contributors. What we eventually came up with was a simple non-mystical formulation of basic Ethics, which I've copied below. If you are interested in a link to the complete articles (which are no longer on Hubpages) I will happily provide it.
The code of Ethics is in two parts:
The Knowledge, comprising the three axioms on which the code is based.
The Code, a framework of simple guidelines that a child can learn to apply.
Part One - The Knowledge
We share the Earth with our fellow Humans, with Animal life and with Plant life.
We are responsible first to each other and our future generations, then to all life on Earth.
Sometimes we are subject to natural forces beyond our control.
Part Two - The Code
Do not hurt, harm or abuse other people
Do not force your will on other people
Do not take what is not yours
Do not be devious, treacherous or deceitful
Do not be cruel to animals
Be moderate in your consumption
Try to be helpful to other people
Be generous with your ideas and talents
When misfortune occurs, do not give in to despair
This is great, para. It's a more extensive version of my cousin's credo: "Be good to the planet and each other."
Thanks It was an enjoyable exercise in the writing and refining. But HubPages isn't its natural home. (It doesn't sell enough Ugg Boots, or something!)
Which other hubbers participated? And where is the series now?
Ralph Deeds inspired the 'be generous with your ideas and talents' one.
SufiDreamer and Mark Knowles were very supportive about the whole idea.
So were many others, but I could only salvage the hubs, not the entire comments thread.
Aya Katz challenged me quite seriously and interestingly on 'be moderate'
But many, many others were just plain helpful about the project. I received very little negativity.
I won't post a link on another Hubber's forum, but the articles can be found by searching for 'The Rational Express' or 'rationalexpress'
Thank you for your interest
Motown, Do you also value the Ten Commandments?
The first three are the God of Moses telling people how he wants to be worshiped. As such they can never be universal, since most people in the World do not acknowledge that God.
The fourth about keeping the sabbath surely isn't important enough to merit a place among the top ten instructions on how to live. (Even though in Numbers 15, v 32-36 Moses, supposedly instructed by God, has a sabbath breaker stoned to death! Not much love and forgiveness there, is there?)
The rest are generally OK, with reservations. For example, murder, adultery, lying and stealing are proscribed, but physical and mental abuse and other forms of cruelty and bullying are not alluded to in any way. That's a serious omission.
The tenth commandment says you should not covet your neighbour's 'possessions' and is very telling in the order in which the possessions are listed: house, wife, male or female servant, ox, donkey. In some translations, 'slave' replaces 'servant'. The underlying assumption (reinforced throughout the Bible) is extremely paternalistic. Some are OK with that, but I'm not. How about you?
I brought up the Ten Commandments because I think they too can guide people toward being proactive in being able to preserve peace of mind, and achieve a positive, fulfilling and rewarding life.
The sabbath is for resting and giving us a break from our survival pursuits. Worshipping God encourages us to keep in our hearts and minds our Father/Mother's love for us.
He/She who crafted us, knew what would be good for us...ethically and logically as well. You mentioned how paternalistic the bible is...It just reflects the consciousness of that society in those times.
I am not threatened by religion for some reason. I think because I see it in the light of eastern thought.
Side note: Of course Jesus came with a new way, Golden Rule, and loving God with body, mind and soul.. but he never said abandon the rules of right living.
They are very much of their time which proves they were written by a man of that time. The society is not dissimilar to modern day Saudi Arabia (minus the expensive toys). As such, I don't think we need to be looking there for up to date guidance. We've learned so much since then. However, if I were to nominate a religious text that makes a genuinely useful contribution, I'd rate the Sermon on the Mount and also (parts of) the Bhagavad Gita way above anything Moses has to offer!
Yes, Krishna lived during the golden ages of the past. (a long long time ago) Jesus came to help humanity during very dark times. We are now coming out of these dark times. We are at the very lowest end of a distant golden age. (a really long time from now.) ...explains a lot if you ask me.
Don't worry we'll be back!
And the same sun will still be shining.
I would question whether Krishna ever existed and would take with a huge pinch of salt any claims that he (or Jesus) were in any way divine. There have been some exceptional people through the ages but I remain unconvinced that there have been, or are now, any supernatural powers or entities.
I am thinking you know nothing of Eastern thought in this case. Of course you are not threatened by this religion. You ignore everything it says and make up your own version to suit.
Is that relevant to my response to paraglider?
I like you kathryn, you tell it like it is! lol
I think we get the picture of life without belief in and institution of:
3. Individual rights
6. Elected leaders
Why are you thanking yourself for your own comments?
Technical? I'm attempting to follow and am having a hard time understanding when you reply and thank yourself.
I am in "threaded." sorry. Anyway I think I fixed it. We're done though, right? I win?
This just in:
No prayer in schools.
No "In God We Trust" on dollar bills.
No religious icons on public buildings.
No reference to God in pledging allegiance to the country.
No sexual discrimination as far as whom can marry whom.
No depicting humans and dinosaurs coexisting on roadside attractions.
No teaching creationism in schools.
No frightening the public with billboards of holy scripture messages.
Aborting fetuses is legal.
Drinking alcohol is legal.
No killing witches
No killing Muslims
(Thanks for being a good sport, wilderness...)
And Thank You for helping us out here!
LOL You're welcome, Kathryn, and more than welcome. Whatever I can do to help straighten out the poor misguided souls of the world. Or give a chuckle to a stray reader or two that has been surfing the forums...
Ethics is the study of moral reasoning.
So, morals have nothing to do with religion. I did not know that. Morals are based on reasonable behavior I guess.
What is reasonable behavior based on?
logical behavior. paraglider is right. I have to rethink all of this.
It is logical to be self-interested.
Yes it is.
paraglider is right. I have to rethink all of this.
I think I should have followed through with just firing myself. I am not up to the task.
Yep. Morals are based on reasonable behavior. Kindness and generosity are the result of deep-seated self-interest.
Why would I be nice to someone? My primate brain says it's because it's the right thing to do, but my reptilian brain says it's because they'll reward me for my niceness.
Why would I purchase goods instead of stealing them? My primate brain says it's because it's the right thing to do, but my reptilian brain says it's because I'll get arrested and then no longer be able to buy the new issue of Hustler.
And so on.
Ethics needs to be taught to the young and separate from Religion. All religions teach is do good, get reward eventually, do bad and get punished eventually because God is always watching. Few people get past this and that's why they are always spouting off about the punishment of hell. Somehow our jails are full of these people.
In defense of Religion:
It is logical for me to assume there is a
It is also logical that I should be able to know that Source.
Being able to directly know the Source (yes, capitalized and singular) of our selves is the purpose behind all religions.
Therefore, religions are helpful to those who want and need to know the Source of themselves and all life. (Just don't fall for illusive man-made doctrines, and internal church politics, while you're at it.)
I would add these logic-based rules to any How to Live list:
Do not get pregnant before you have a home to raise a child.
Do not get addicted to any substance.
Do not attempt to fool or trick anyone.
Listen to your Mother and Father.
Don't be afraid to advise and counsel teenagers.
Do not try to control others in any way. (As long as they are not children or young teens needing your guidance.)
Respect all children and their inner lives.
A logical extension of this one would forbid the teaching of most religious material to children, such as the first three of the ten commandments. This is exactly why I would include ethics but exclude religion from education.
With this exception, that to make sense of history, literature, culture in general, it is necessary to understand how people used to think, and how many still do. Therefore there has to be a place for education _about_ religious beliefs, but not until the child has learned critical thinking.
Excellent logical, commonsense principles indeed. It is amazing how many people DON'T follow such principles. This is why this society is in the malaise it is in.
I also meant to say that ethical or moral guidelines are likely to meet with pretty wide agreement. It's only when one includes supernatural based statements (which here you have not done) that all hope of universality goes out the window.
So you see, your Logical and Scientific Guide Book on How to Live, which when you started this thread you thought would be a non-starter, in fact turns out to be the best approach after all
Okay you win. Thanks for your persistence.
- paraglider mentions universality. It seems the test is whether these precepts are applicable to all.
...minorities, special cases, special needs, all people should be guaranteed equality as to agreed upon rights in the name of justice.
Logically, these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Surely we can keep these rights by always insisting upon them. It requires a proactive stance and simple understanding to comprehend when they are being threatened. And we value them because they are what we need, whether we believe God gave them to us, or not.
I think we can agree that all people legally present in a country should be equal under the law.
I think it is also a good principle that every action and pursuit is allowed (maximum freedom) unless society through its legislative procedures has specifically outlawed that action.
Life and liberty are therefore guaranteed. Pursuit of happiness is a personal choice that is also protected up to the point of illegal forms of pursuit.
None of this requires existence of or belief in any God, does it?
You've added this bit since I replied to your first draft, above.
And yes, absolutely. The people need to be on their guard against erosion of rights. There has to be a compromise, e.g. between national security and personal privacy, but we as a public have to ensure it is a compromise approved by the majority. And this is far more important to society than our personal notions of the supernatural.
I have scottish ancestry too. My granfather's last name was Dunbar. His middle name was Mulford. I find this an odd middle name. Is there a town in Scotland called Mulford?
Thanks so much for enlightening us: the few who have been following along.
I can't think of a town called Mulford, but there's certainly a Dunbar:
Cope sent a challenge frae Dunbar,
Sayin' Charlie meet me an' ye daur,
An' I'll learn ye the art of War,
If ye'll meet me in the mornin'!
"Men upon too many occasions do give not give their own understandings fair play; but yielding to some untoward bias, they entangle themselves in words and confound themselves in subtleties." Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. 1788. ( Alexander Hamilton also had Scottish heritage.)
by Alem Belton 6 years ago
After an internal debate between science and philosophy I am leaning towards an answer of yes. This is due to the fact that the scientific explanation for the existence of life is greatly flawed, which leaves only one other possible solution. I usually only believe things that can be proven but...
by Alexander A. Villarasa 4 years ago
Andrew Parker, in his book "The Genesis Enigma" posits that if the biblical account of the creation of the universe and the subsequent explosion of life (specifically on earth) IS interpreted not literally but metaphorically, then it would jibe neatly with what we now scientifically...
by aka-dj 6 years ago
So many Atheists and Agnostics refute faith/religion with living by logic and reason. But, to be really honest, it is totally impossible.What do you say?
by Joseph O Polanco 3 years ago
Scientifically speaking, how does one distinguish between moral and immoral behavior?For instance, using the scientific method, is it wrong for an atheist to rape a little girl to death?
by Kris 2 years ago
What are your thoughts on the Paranormal and Supernatural?I have my own beliefs, but I would like to hear from others.
by SaiKit 7 years ago
A lot of skeptics made the following logical fallacy:Skeptics: Can you prove that God exists? if not, then you are illogical if you believe in a God that you can't prove to be existing! This is the fallacy of "False Delimma" Just because you can't prove a theory or belief, doesn't mean...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|